I just read the full SI article and oh my my is she crazy? The women that argue this are wrong and make life difficult for everyone. I hope they take her off the air soon. If they don't, Mitch really is a goofball. Their audience, even the ones that like B&B can't be listening to this stuff.

JDC has a BIGFAN/defender on the Larz board:

http://chicagoradioandmedia.com/message ... artik-more

Hint: FEEL THE BITE!!!

_________________
Not a mult.

Julie DiCaro has been outstanding, not just on 670 AM The SCORE's air, but also on WSCR's much-maligned Website at CBSChicago.com writing columns in regards to ongoing developments of the Patrick Kane investigation. It's very unfortunate that DiCaro, as well as ESPN 1000 AM's Sarah Spain, have gotten less than flattering Tweets in regards to the ongoing Kane probe.

I just think DiCaro & Spain are trying to do their jobs in regards to a very serious case involving a Blackhawks' star that still hasn't been charged with ANY crime. For all I know, #88 might never be charged, and we may never know what really happened that night in upstate New York. I think it's wrong to take out anger on 2 sports reporters/anchors trying to simply do their jobs.

_________________
-- source

They may be true but it may be more helpful if women like you that are not SJW's or all the "in" people of the moment on tv speak up and shout that.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

I don't get how saying "hey, this is some shitty stuff that we deal with" is bad. I can get how it's quixotic, but I don't get what's objectively 'wrong' about what she said. Women get a different brand of abuse when it comes to Sports Twitter. Is that really worth pointing out, eh. But I don't think it harms anything.

She used an article from Jemele Hill to support her position so I'm going to say she agrees with the thoughts. There are 2 terrible and damaging arguments they use. The first one is "Women who are confident, assertive and opinionated are resented in every sector of society. " It's just not true, but I will say those opinions need to be right and truthful. And it matters how you deliver the message. The second one is "We’re demanding respect, and some just don’t like it.” Why would any one like somebody demanding respect, Respect should be given and then received, when it's earned.

She is getting called names? Boo hoo. I don't agree with or support it but boo hoo. I'm pretty sure if she were a a guy they call him a pussy or dickface or whatever.

Her message isn't being received well and it's because she has an opinion and many think it's wrong. And it probably is wrong but she is deeming it as truth. She is standing behind the you guys don't like what I have to say because I'm a girl and it's not freaking true. I don't like what she has to say and it's not because she is a female, it's because I think she is wrong and a lunatic.

So do we call you an 'Aunt Tom' (Aunt Tammy?) or something?

What about common decency? That shouldn't be by default?

I think the uptake in this context is that a sportsery person is given some level of initial respect when it's a dude, and there's an unnecessary level of 'earning it' when it's a woman.

She's a little off when she says that women get disrespected more on the internet than men. Everybody gets shit on the internet. Just most people don't care. Hell, I like the insults of me if they're funny.

Granted, death threats are different. But in that article she was talking about general insults. She thinks women take more abuse. I think she's wrong.

They are demanding respect while acting like goofballs. I'm a woman! I have opinions! I demand respect! They aren't walking in say hey I got an opinion...here it is.

I agree with this. The part that sucks is that Julie DiCaro had earned her credibility, she just melted down a few days ago when it turned out she backed the wrong horse.

_________________

She shouldnt have been backing anyone. Thus the issue.

Are her and Bernstsin still clinging to something happening to Kane? At least legally speaking.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

That's probably true, but I think there are places where a man has to earn respect, like on a quilting message board, for example. There are traditional gender roles. It's kind of silly to pretend like they never existed.

_________________
Don't take it personally.

You may be given the benefit of the doubt but you can lose that quickly if you act like an ass hat. And yes sometimes women have to earn respect but most of the time it's not impossible.

That's very true, Spaulding. You may be a woman, but at least you never started a thread hoping that your favorite team lost its playoff game.

_________________
Don't take it personally.

It's really this simple.

If you want to be an anchor, then your job is to read news, not to become the news.

_________________

She couldnt seperate herself...which was bad enough, but then she wont acknowledge that she wasnt unbiased as she said.

This Kaner thing really let the ugly girls in sports media hang out , or talk with the pretty girls. See, there was upside!

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

_________________

I don't have a problem with her bias. When she wrote her column on how she was raped and how that affects her perception of the case, that was good. It was a voice to consider. What it wasn't was a green light to start playing intrepid journalist on twitter and engage trolls with the Dan Bernstein playbook: "where did I say that? SHOW ME WHERE I SAID EXACTLY THAT"

_________________

yeah i find it rather disingenuous when someone goes to town implying something and backing it all the way up to baiting the trolls to bring out their worst, but then when shit doesn't go their way it's all technicalities and WHERE DID I ACTUALLY SAY THAT?!?! and all the people who were egged on are now at fault because technicalities.

i think in the shakes thread i was referenced as a source of jdc claiming death threats, but what happened was that she screencapped/tweeted-out the picture of the 1-tweet account saying "I HOPE A BLACKHAWK HITS YOU IN THE HEAD WITH A SLAPSHOT... AND IT KILLS YOU!!!" and i said that "watch her claim death threats" which falls into this whole IMPLY DEATH THREATS thing and then the "i fear for my safety" / [cancel appearance/work/etc] thing in the playbook.... but then after it blows over she can technically be like I NEVER SAID DEATH THREATS because she never technically did, but i mean when you're going out of your way to promote a tweet that says I HOPE YOU DIE and archive it via screencap so it can't get deleted away.... i mean, yeah, you're all but technically saying "THEY WANNA KILL ME FOR MY REPORTING!!!!"

...and of course this happens in the midst of a "best of the worst" RT-a-thon.

_________________

Can't believe I laughed at that.

_________________

I laughed at it too. That's a good one.

_________________

Is everyone at the Score safe and in attendance today? Has Lockdown been lifted?

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

She totally Anita Sarkeesian'd herself. I guarantee there was no threat. SJW needs to create attention around self for cause.

How so?

_________________
Soccer 1,2,3
Spanish Honor Society 1,2,3,4
Forensics 1,2,3,4

"Smiles with Nostrils"

"...no Hmong, go find some blacks"

She had done some professional blogging for a while, so it wasn't as if she popped up out of nowhere. Also, I thought her initial piece on Kane was very good. Of course, it immediately established her as partisan to anyone with the reasoning abilities of a third-grader, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't have written it or shouldn't have talked about the case, just that she miscast herself as a journalist and shouldn't have rolled in the muck with anonymous trolls.

_________________

going back to what JORR said perfectly earlier, some of these women want it both ways. they want to be seen as these strong "womyn", and then at the same time, they want to be able to cower in the corner like a fragile little lamb when they feel threatened. i remember jemele being on M&M with, i believe michael smith, filling in...and i normally like jemele and her opinions. but they were talking about dating, and she literally said something to the effect of: "guys, just because we want to be seen as equals and treated as such, that doesn't mean we don't like it when you pick up the check and open doors for us and pull out the chair for us. chivalry isn't dead." how is that...being equal? i mean if you want to be doted upon, fine. but that's usually why guys don't think of them as "equal", because they're doting on you. i think she had said she's picked up a check before, but also said that can be a dealbreaker. could you confuse guys a little more?

Yeah, it was a fine opinion piece, but then she wanted to be the lead reporter providing all the breaking news on the story and each time there was a new development she clearly slanted it in a way that was biased against Kane. She came very close to accusing Kane (or his people, if you really think there's any difference) of tampering with the evidence.

_________________
Don't take it personally.

It's funny to see her Twitter army congratulate her on doing such angreat job of just reporting the facts in this case.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.